From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: schuenem@informatik.tu-muenchen.de (Ulf Schuenemann) Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/02/12 Message-ID: <5ds4ct$hg9@sunsystem5.informatik.tu-muenchen.de>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 218226071 Distribution: global References: <32E67751.4AFC@parcplace.com> <5c6468$2rv$1@A-abe.resnet.ucsb.edu> <5c9b3u$a8$1@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> Organization: Technische Universitaet Muenchen, Germany Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object Originator: schuenem@hpbroy7.informatik.tu-muenchen.de Date: 1997-02-12T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) writes: ... |> I've often thought that it would be an improvement to Ada, if the |> programmer of the function declaration decides whether named or |> positional notation should be used, for each parameter. Instead, Ada |> allows a little bit too much flexibility, for my taste: The programmer |> of each call gets to decide. Also, you can write the parameters in any |> order, if they're named, which you can't do in Smalltalk. A technical note: IMO this discussion confuses the notion of "named parameter" with the notion of "mixfix". AFAIK Smalltalk has not "named parameters" [of course parameters _have_ names inside the method, but not outside]. Positional correspondence is used to bind the arguments in a method-call to its parameter-names. Smalltalk has "mixfix". The name (=selector?) of the method can be split in several words. In the method-call the arguments stand between these words. Ada has "named parameters". The name of the parameters appears (in Ada: can appear) in the function-call. The arguments in the functions-call are bound to parameters by name-correspondence. AFAIK Ada does not have "mixfix" [for userdefined functions - If-then-else might be seen as mixfix-function.] Just my $.02 Ulf Schuenemann -------------------------------------------------------------------- ,_. Ulf Sch�nemann #, \ Fakult�t f�r Informatik, Technische Universit�t M�nchen, Germany. | > mailto:schuenem@informatik.tu-muenchen.de v=-< http://hphalle2.informatik.tu-muenchen.de/~schuenem/